Using large language models to directly screen electronic databases as an alternative to traditional search strategies such as the Cochrane highly sensitive search for filtering randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews

A critical step in systematic reviews involves the definition of a search strategy, with keywords and Boolean logic, to filter electronic databases. We hypothesize that it is possible to screen articles in electronic databases using large language models (LLMs) as an alternative to search equations. To investigate this matter, we compared two methods to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in electronic databases: filtering databases using the Cochrane highly sensitive search and an assessment by an LLM.We retrieved studies indexed in PubMed with a publication date between September 1 and September 30, 2024 using the sole keyword "diabetes." We compared the performance of the Cochrane highly sensitive search and the assessment of all titles and abstracts extracted directly from the database by GPT-4o-mini to identify RCTs. Reference standard was the manual screening of retrieved articles by two independent reviewers.The search retrieved 6377 records, of which 210 (3.5%) were primary reports of RCTs. The Cochrane highly sensitive search filtered 2197 records and missed one RCT (sensitivity 99.5%, 95% CI 97.4% to100%; specificity 67.8%, 95% CI 66.6% to 68.9%). Assessment of all titles and abstracts from the electronic database by GPT filtered 1080 records and included all 210 primary reports of RCTs (sensitivity 100%, 95% CI 98.3% to100%; specificity 85.9%, 95% CI 85.0% to 86.8%).LLMs can screen all articles in electronic databases to identify RCTs as an alternative to the Cochrane highly sensitive search. This calls for the evaluation of LLMs as an alternative to rigid search strategies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Research Synthesis Methods
Published
2025-10-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2025.10034
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Using large language models to directly screen electronic databases as an alternative to traditional search strategies such as the Cochrane highly sensitive search for filtering randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews

Carolina Graña Possamai, Philippe Ravaud, Isabelle Boutron, Viet‐Thi Tran
Research Synthesis Methods
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

Using large language models to directly screen electronic databases as an alternative to traditional search strategies such as the Cochrane highly sensitive search for filtering randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews

Carolina Graña Possamai, Philippe Ravaud, Isabelle Boutron, Viet‐Thi Tran
article en

Abstract

A critical step in systematic reviews involves the definition of a search strategy, with keywords and Boolean logic, to filter electronic databases. We hypothesize that it is possible to screen articles in electronic databases using large language models (LLMs) as an alternative to search equations. To investigate this matter, we compared two methods to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in electronic databases: filtering databases using the Cochrane highly sensitive search and an assessment by an LLM.We retrieved studies indexed in PubMed with a publication date between September 1 and September 30, 2024 using the sole keyword "diabetes." We compared the performance of the Cochrane highly sensitive search and the assessment of all titles and abstracts extracted directly from the database by GPT-4o-mini to identify RCTs. Reference standard was the manual screening of retrieved articles by two independent reviewers.The search retrieved 6377 records, of which 210 (3.5%) were primary reports of RCTs. The Cochrane highly sensitive search filtered 2197 records and missed one RCT (sensitivity 99.5%, 95% CI 97.4% to100%; specificity 67.8%, 95% CI 66.6% to 68.9%). Assessment of all titles and abstracts from the electronic database by GPT filtered 1080 records and included all 210 primary reports of RCTs (sensitivity 100%, 95% CI 98.3% to100%; specificity 85.9%, 95% CI 85.0% to 86.8%).LLMs can screen all articles in electronic databases to identify RCTs as an alternative to the Cochrane highly sensitive search. This calls for the evaluation of LLMs as an alternative to rigid search strategies.

Research Synthesis MethodsVol. 16(6)
Inserm (FR), Université Paris Cité (FR), Hotel Dieu Hospital (CA), Sorbonne Université (FR), Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (FR), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord (FR), Sorbonne Paris Cité (FR), Hôtel-Dieu de Paris (FR), Cochrane (CA), Hôtel-Dieu de Lyon (FR), Cochrane (GB), Columbia University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Using large language models to directly screen electronic databases as an alternative to traditional search strategies such as the Cochrane highly sensitive search for filtering randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews — Carolina Graña Possamai, Philippe Ravaud, et al. · Research Synthesis Methods (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS